We should work toward renewables, keep fossil fuels
Letters to the Editor
Alexandra Ammonette’s letter of Jan. 9 calling for support of alternative energy sources and a carbon tax seems more an emotional plea that a logically consistent argument based on fact.
She begins with a false claim, “We know we can’t keep polluting our atmosphere with fossil fuels without causing a destabilized climate system.”
Sorry, but we don’t “know” that. Many of us speculate, theorize and give out opinions, but the science is not settled.
Based on that claim, she calls for bipartisan support to “stabilize it” (it being the climate). If we do not know that fossil fuel use can destabilize climate, we surely do not know that mankind can do much to stabilize it.
She claims, “We could meet the entire world’s energy needs with renewable sources in 20 years.”
Theoretically, perhaps. Realistically, never. That goal requires nations immediately give up their sovereignty to the UN or some other international institution, and volunteers to foot the bill for nations unable to pay.
Her statement about renewables producing higher paying jobs is probably true, but the world experience to date shows more jobs lost because of their creation than gained.
Moreover, her own statistics about the number of jobs to be created emphasizes a fact she hides- renewables are higher cost sources. Add to that the costs of the carbon tax she supports. (Her carbon tax dividend returned 100 percent to American households is a pipedream.)
Then she adds, “We could make the transition to a green economy rapidly and reduce our emissions without restoring to government regulations.”
Everything she proposes requires taxes and regulation, some international and some national. And what does she mean when she says, “To work domestically and on an international scale, an effective border tax adjustment will be necessary.” You guess.
Should we work towards increasing renewables? Certainly. Should we denigrate, penalize and stamp out fossil fuel use? Certainly not.